Andrew Livesy (Free Press, February 28) supports John Hayes’ earlier criticism (Free Press, January 31) of the successful legal case brought by Gina Miller and others, including me (as I helped crowdfund the ‘People’s Challenge’, heard concurrently in the High Court).
The fact is that, under our system of representative parliamentary democracy, the ‘royal prerogative’ has never been used to overturn an earlier Act of Parliament since September 20, 1610 – that’s over 406 years ago.
When voters put a cross against Leave last June, they were voting for the UK to leave the EU, not to change our long-established, democratic system of government.
Before the Referendum, Leave campaigners were constantly urging voters to “take back our country”, “take back control” and “#TakeControl”, suggesting parliamentary sovereignty had somehow been fatally compromised by UK membership of the EU and hence needed to be restored.
So, it’s deeply ironic that Brexiteers, like John Hayes and Andrew Livesy, should argue that Parliamentary sovereignty should have been overruled by royal prerogative for the first time in over 406 years.
Moreover, Andrew Livesy insults me by lumping me in his category of “rich, well-connected people . . . who think their view matters more than ordinary people”, when, in reality, I’m the true democrat on this issue.
In contrast, he’s so obsessed with ensuring the UK leaves the EU that he’s willing to sacrifice representative parliamentary democracy on the altar of Brexit.
Yet again, die-hard Brexiteers continue to ignore the facts and reality, instead pushing their passionate belief that Brexit will benefit the UK overall and our constituency in particular.
Unfortunately, it won’t – and the sooner we engage in an informed debate on Brexit, the better.